* Re: [ANN] U-Boot v2025.04-rc5 released
2025-03-25 2:01 [ANN] U-Boot v2025.04-rc5 released Tom Rini
@ 2025-03-25 9:17 ` Mattijs Korpershoek
2025-03-25 14:51 ` Tom Rini
2025-04-02 23:53 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mattijs Korpershoek @ 2025-03-25 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Rini, u-boot; +Cc: u-boot-custodians, u-boot-board-maintainers
Hi Tom,
On lun., mars 24, 2025 at 20:01, Tom Rini <trini@konsulko.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> So it's release day and I have tagged and pushed things out. This will
> be merged to -next shortly.
>
> One thing to note is that just today a bug was reported due to a missing
> 'fallthrough;' line and in turn we need to fix that in a number of
> places and ensure it doesn't return. This will happen between now and
> the release as I think it's clear enough.
>
> While we have been having regular meetings after an -rc release, I have
> assorted personal appointments this week and need to reschedule for next
> week instead.
The calendar invite on https://www.u-boot.org/ still has an event for
today (25 march).
To avoid any confusion, could you update to Tuesday 1st of April?
>
> Repeating what I said on the -rc3 release,
> I've been looking in to seeing how we could get modern project
> governance setup and some umbrella organization to handle financial
> matters, etc. To that end, I've been talking with the Software Freedom
> Conservancy (https://sfconservancy.org/). I continue to need to post a
> bit longer of an email explaining my thoughts and looking for volunteers
> to help with organization.
>
> In terms of a changelog,
> git log --merges v2025.04-rc4..v2025.04-rc5
> As always, more details in pull requests (or the tags referenced by
> them) will result in more details here.
>
> I plan to have the final release will be 07 April 2025.
>
> Thanks all!
>
> --
> Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [ANN] U-Boot v2025.04-rc5 released
2025-03-25 2:01 [ANN] U-Boot v2025.04-rc5 released Tom Rini
2025-03-25 9:17 ` Mattijs Korpershoek
@ 2025-04-02 23:53 ` Tom Rini
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tom Rini @ 2025-04-02 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: u-boot; +Cc: u-boot-custodians, u-boot-board-maintainers
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4657 bytes --]
On Mon, Mar 24, 2025 at 08:01:30PM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> So it's release day and I have tagged and pushed things out. This will
> be merged to -next shortly.
>
> One thing to note is that just today a bug was reported due to a missing
> 'fallthrough;' line and in turn we need to fix that in a number of
> places and ensure it doesn't return. This will happen between now and
> the release as I think it's clear enough.
>
> While we have been having regular meetings after an -rc release, I have
> assorted personal appointments this week and need to reschedule for next
> week instead.
The community meeting was Tuesday, sorry for the delay, and what follows
are my notes from it.
- I gave the general status of the -rc5 release and noted the "DHCP
bootdev hunt" regression that was reported and would be handled for
the release.
- Ilias noted that capsule update + mbedTLS doesn't work, but it was
unclear what exactly the root cause was. However, that capsule tests
aren't running in CI is another part of the problem, and we need to
get those running again. I noted that we also need to get some of
the pytest changes that modify how / which filesystem images we make
(along with exFAT support) need to get merged before we touch some
of that code more.
- I also noted that given a recent thread from a dts/upstream change, we
need to be clear that it's expected to call git send-email with
--suppress-cc=all for those patches as to not spam the kernel people.
- I mentioned we now have social media accounts, asked if Jesse T would
do the Instagram account that we now have as they're active there. I also
noted that we have an account on X, and that both Instagram and X are
linked from the website. Jesse noted that these exist because they
asked about the broken links on IRC and so Simon made accounts. We
discussed if maybe it would be best to just remove these accounts, or
to have someone actively use them. After asking Simon for some
feedback on this as he owns the website, we agreed to drop the X link
and work with Jesse for access to the Instagram account. Karen noted
SFC is on Mastodon and that works for SFC.
- Andre brought up series to fix missing "fallthrough" issues. The first
part is now posted and reviewed, and wondered if the next part (as CI
now gets farther and fails more) should be done in the same way. I
said yes, especially since this next batch will have more
platform-specific issues that need to be reviewed by the appropriate
custodian.
- Ilias brought up the MMU patch series again. It turns out that a bunch
of platforms have copy/pasted seemingly some wrong code around MMU
setup and so we need to do something about fixing that up. It's an
invalid, reserved but currently non-problematic flag. Adding a print
warning may get people to address them. Will have a warning patch for
-rc1.
- Ilias wants to get more tests running, including capsule updates.
Everyone agrees in general with running more tests.
- Specifically, Ilias wants to get more TPM tests written and running,
but doesn't think extending sandbox TPM is the effort when we have a
specification-validated TPM we can use in QEMU and that validation
is extremely important. As a long term goal, he would like to move
to having the ACS (architecture compliance suite) tests run, when
possible. But it's extremely slow (8 hours was mentioned) and not
quite ready from ARM either. I noted we can do things on a tag only,
and this test would be a good candidate. For the TPM side, Simon
disagrees about it not being worth the effort for sandbox, but won't
NAK, He noted that the Chromebook Coral TPM tests don't work. Ilias
agreed to work with him off-call on these problems as a challenge is
that the CR50 in Chromebooks is not a 100% specification valid TPMv2
device. Andre noted TF-A has added TPM support to Pi, and Ilias
clarified it's something about an event log and is a bit different,
but does give some measurement. Ilias wants more TPM tests to be
able to verify some of these new potential security features that
are coming, ie bigger eventlog.
- Jesse asked about setting some GD flags and how to set them, and is
arch_cpu_init/etc where it's best done today but, but sometimes they
need to set some earlier than that. Would it be better to do this via
Kconfig or no? I noted that we have added more hooks as needed. Would
arch_cpu_init be ok? I said yes. Jesse will post a patch.
--
Tom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 659 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread